AMEX & AIC & Newman

[Blue Thunder]

As an update, have received the enclosed.

Can anybody advise how I should respond. Cant afford a Brief, cant get legal aid and their offer is pretty pointless to me. Does anybody feel I still have a case to fight in court and if so whats my next step please?

SD211008.pdf

SD211008 offer.pdf

[ScarletPimpernel]

It might just be my computer, but the docs aren't working properly for me.

[Blue Thunder]

Ok - am trying upoad again.

SD211008.pdf

SD211008 offer.pdf

[pt2537]

B.U.M.P

 

Bring

Up

My

Post

 

its a way of bringing your thread to the top of the list

[pt2537]

Ok - am trying upoad again.

Nope i get " insufficient data for an image" when i try to open it

[Blue Thunder]

aaaah yes - very clever.

Any thoughts on my post PT? the one with the attachments of course.

[supasnooper]

Hi Blue,

 

your pdf attachments aren't able to be opened.

 

please can you repost them ?

[Blue Thunder]

ok - try these

sd21010801.pdf

sd21010802.pdf

[ScarletPimpernel]

The letters look similar to the sort of rubbish I had from another of Amex's solicitors. What is interesting is not what they say, it's what they don't say. There is no mention, for example, that the agreement is enforceable, just a lot of waffle intended to mislead you into thinking that the 'evidence' they mention might have some bearing - which it doesn't.

 

The settlement offer is also familiar. They are attempting to scare you by suggesting a figure you are unlikely to be able to afford, and thus suggest that the court claim must go ahead.

 

However, in my view your defence that the agreement is unenforceable trumps all their bullsh1t - and I suspect that they know it, hence the latest tactic.

[Blue Thunder]

mmm........ interesting comments Scarlet. At the end of the day this is what I have been fighting all the way through - and if you go back to the beginning of this thread you will see that the comments indicated it was totally unenforceable - I dont know if I'm playing with fire or not. I have had to take on board what has been said through this site and I have felt reasonably confident all the way through. I suppose realistically only time will tell. I respect yours and PT's comments to date along with all other contributors. Having posted the original agreements on here and being led to believe they were unenforceable I suppose the big day approaches when I found out how true this is!! Frightening really - as never been here before and really gone out on a limb to fight my corner!

 

Other comments are of course very welcome.

Thanks

 

Blue

[ScarletPimpernel]

I can tel you that in my case it didn't get as far as court. I stuck with my view that the agreements (4 accounts) were unenforceable because they did not contain the prescribed terms. I got a threatening letter from lawyers with an equally risible settlement offer, but I maintained my position - and also pointed out to the solicitors the many breaches of the OFT Guidance and CPUTR committed by Amex and their DCAs, after which nothing more was heard.

 

It's worth remembering that solicitors are like prostitutes; they'll go as far as the client wants as long as they're paid.

[Blue Thunder]

well - this is already in court and this is their response to the Judges Order for a One month stay - so I AM in the legal process presumably and have to act accordingly with my response - that is always my fear (that I say or do the wrong thing out of naivety) thats why I always welcome the observations and comments of those more seasoned professionals in this game.

[Blue Thunder]

Message for PT - do you have any comments to make please?

[Blue Thunder]

Hi Blue Thunder.

 

Stick with it. I'm a little bit further down the road with Amex and Co. Allocation Questionnaires and Court Directions have been dealt with and Amex has failed to supply paperwork as directed by the court, naughty bunnies, so my day in court opposite them is only a few weeks away. As they've ignored court directions the judge should begin with a rollicking of their representative. That's if it gets that far, here's hoping.

 

CP

 

Hey Cunning Plan,

You osted on this thread back in August.

 

Did you ever get further down the road with these clowns??

[Blue Thunder]

As an update.

 

Having had an extended stay from the courts in an attempt to negotiate with these clowns and despite them telling me they were pressing on with their claim against me. I was surprised to receive a leeter from them referring to my original defence and it goes like this.............

" We refer to your defence dated........... Within the same, you allege that the Agreement was not properly executed and does not contain the prescribed terms and is therefore unenforceable in law.

We invite you to particularise the terms you contend are omitted from the Agreement and furthermore, the basis for so contending."

 

They give me 14 days to respond.

 

As I expected to lay the 'facts' down before the judge - as this is the whole basis of my defence - are they entitled to ask and by doing so how does this appear in the eyes of the law. I feel as the 'ace' up my sleeve could be dropped before i get the chance to use it.

 

any thoughts would be welcome.

 

Thanks

Blue

[banker_rhymes_with]

I'd tell them to stop fharting about, and suggest they tell you where the Prescribed Terms are? And get them to confirm the where abouts of the Original Agreement while they are at it.

 

It's their Agreement, after all, they wrote the damned thing! So, if they can't tell you, who can?

 

But, make sure they don't forget to confirm that they do have an Original copy of it, and that the Prescribed Terms are contained within the four corners of it.

 

Amex seem unable to hang on to their Agreements, and seem particularly unable to hang on to the ones that were arguably unenforceable. What better way to lose the evidence than to Scan one side, and then swear blind what was on the other side.

 

Cheers,

BRW

[Blue Thunder]

Thanks for your reply BRW.

Am planning to do just that!

 

BT

[Cunning Plan]

Hi Blue Thunder,

 

Do you have an update on this case for us?

 

AMEX backed down and withdrew their claim in my case mind you it was with hours to spare before the scheduled court appearence.

 

CP

[Blue Thunder]

Hi CP,

 

My court case is imminent - they are pushing it all the way - I dont know which way it will go but I am quietly confident. I am really interested to know why they backed down on yours - if you dont want to share the info to all and sundry please feel free to PM me or do you have a thread.

 

Cheers

 

Blue

[banker_rhymes_with]

Hello Blue!

 

Just had a quick scan through this Thread again, but what about their Default Notice?

 

Their letters confirm they regarded this as being a default situation on your part, and they Terminated the alleged Agreement because of that. There can therefore be no doubt that this is a default termination, so they cannot use s76 or s98.

 

They must follow s87/s88 and must have issued you with a s87(1) Default Notice before Termination.

 

Amex cannot seem to get them right, so I would suggest finding that, or asking/demanding that the Court stay the case until Amex produce the Default Notice.

 

Consider going to the Court and submitting this request via an N244 Application. Do it Tomorrow if you cannot find that Default Notice or they have made no mention of one.

 

They need a valid Default Notice to enjoy the benefits of s87, so cannot Terminate lawfully without one, and cannot ask you for sums that were only otherwise due in the future.

 

No valid Default Notice means that have no right to take the next step of going to Court, and any Claim they do wish to make will be limited to just the sums due before Termination...i.e. any Arrears, less any Unlawful Charges and/or PPI.

 

This is a major issue that seems to have been overlooked.

 

Cheers,

BRW

Edited April 28, 2009 by banker_rhymes_with
Typo

[Cunning Plan]

Hi Blue Thunder,

 

In response to your question in post 94.

 

Amex / Brachers went right to the wire with my case. They posted their consent order with three days to go to the case being heard. I received it the day before the hearing!

Even upto 10 days before the hearing I got a letter saying they would settle for half the amount they were claiming.

 

They pushed all the way but my feeling was to stick it out and let the judge decide. Bare in mind though Amex and co had made some silly, but crucial, mistakes in my case which strengthened my defence. That said they still haven't produced a compliant agreement in your case so you are right to be quietly confident.

 

If it does go all the way and you are in front a judge don't let their rep lead a merry dance away from the important facts you've highlighted in your defence. They will try and cloud the issue, for example, at one point Amex tried to suggest there wasn't a need for a CCA as this was a 'commerical loan' that was a little left field to say the least but smacked of despiration too.

 

Good luck CAGers are behind you.

 

CP

Edited April 29, 2009 by Cunning Plan
typos

[Blue Thunder]

HI BRW,

Thanks for the input.

AMEX did actually issue a Default Notice under Section 87(1) to me - so I'm not sure how this affects your argument?

Please explain if poss?

Thanks

Blue

[Blue Thunder]

Hi CP,

 

Thanks for your update - pleased to hear it went well for you.

What is a Consent Order and how did that affect you with your debt. Did you effectively win the case therefore and it was struck out?

 

Cheers

Blue

[banker_rhymes_with]

Hello BT!

 

AMEX did actually issue a Default Notice under Section 87(1) to me - so I'm not sure how this affects your argument?

Please explain if poss?

 

OK, that then confirms that Amex regarded this as being a default situation on your part, so they must follow s87/s88 of the Act, i.e. to Terminate your Agreement following the steps outlined in the Act.

 

They needed to issue you with a valid Default Notice before Termination, if they are to enjoy the benefits of s87.

 

Have a good look at that Default Notice, and I bet it is defective, as Amex have major problems getting them right.

 

Read the first page or two of this Thread to get a handle on the Default Notice issues, and how it can affect the situation to your considerable advantage:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/170345-tale-dodgy-dn.html#post1837307

 

Cheers,

BRW

[banker_rhymes_with]

Hello BT!

 

If you need to read what all of the various sections of the Act say, here's the link for that:

 

The Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

Cheers,

BRW